AMD Radeon HD 7970 3072 MB

[mastrdrver]

Hey Wizz, what monitor connections did you use for the multi display setup?

I've read that when using two DP monitors that the clocks do no go up at all.

Thanks in advance.

[theJesus]

Originally Posted by cadaveca

That's the thing..I don't have teh cash, really. I got 20 motherboards sitting here, and a CPU for nearly every platform, but I didn't pay for most of it. If I'm going to make a purchase like dual 7970's...I have to be very sure that it's gonig to work well for me.

I am done buying stuff for minor gains, for more than double the cost, and then some. I mean really..3960X? Even that CPU is kinda useless to me. but I'd liek to put it to use...

I just want the tech that AMD told me 2 years ago worked so well..to work like they described. I bought my monitors before the 5870 launch, and as soon as they were out, I bought two 5870's. I spent the next year RMA'ing my cards every three weeks, until the 6950's came out, and XFX replaced a 5870 with a 6950 for me. I then bought a second 6950. After NINE 5870 RMAs.

Still, I have flicker on secondary monitors, and Eyefinity performance is terrible. So terrible, in fact, that I tried going back to 2560x1600, but that was no better!!


And now..I'm supposed to believe AMD is being honest about high-res performance, again? after they blew the Bulldozer launch...I think not.

90% of the "new tech" offered in the 7970 is useless for 99% of users out there. THAT is why we have a paper launch, and no cards. Heck, FX-8150 has only been available locally for about 3 weeks.

Then like I originally said, don't do anything. It sucks that there still isn't a solution that can truly handle eyefinity.

[Crap Daddy]

Originally Posted by cadaveca

After NINE 5870 RMAs.

What in hell was wrong with those? I mean nine? You kept going on and on?

[cadaveca]

Originally Posted by theJesus

Then like I originally said, don't do anything. It sucks that there still isn't a solution that can truly handle eyefinity.

Ok, but you understand that you've categorically agreed wit hthe 7970 being useless, right?

I mean, only multi-monitor users and 2560x1600 users need more than what I have already.


So, to me, that's the compare I need, as high-end VGA solution user...I need to see, either dual 6990's, or 4x6950/6970, vs dual 7970's, in 5870x1080.

Of course, Eyefinity users aren't that common, so barely any reviewers have the hardware for such a compare.

This whole launch is completely useless to me.

Originally Posted by Crap Daddy

What in hell was wrong with those? I mean nine? You kept going on and on?

No idea, dude. Most cards had bad ram. One had a coldbug at idle. XFX kept replacing cards, so clearly it wasn't anything I did, and now, I've put my 6950's in the same hardware that the 5870's were in, and don't have any issues, so clearly i got a whole bunch of bad cards, and that is all. but then again, I was pushing Eyefinity @ 5870x1080, and 2560x1600, so maybe that was jsut plain ol' too much for the cards.

[theJesus]

Originally Posted by cadaveca

Ok, but you understand that you've categorically agreed wit hthe 7970 being useless, right?

I mean, only multi-monitor users and 2560x1600 users need more than what I have already.


So, to me, that's the compare I need, as high-end VGA solution user...I need to see, either dual 6990's, or 4x6950/6970, vs dual 7970's, in 5870x1080.

Of course, Eyefinity users aren't that common, so barely any reviewers have the hardware for such a compare.

This whole launch is completely useless to me.

I absolutely agree. Also, like Crap Daddy said, what was up with those 5870's?

[Crap Daddy]

Originally Posted by cadaveca

Of course, Eyefinity users aren't that common, so barely any reviewers have the hardware for such a compare.

Here, some eyefinity for ya:

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/..._card_review/9

[magibeg]

Originally Posted by Nimmer

Nice find thanks Jeager! Looks like the lead of 10% increase gets cut in half to 5% when comparing it to a 3gig GTX580...

I couldn't help myself here.... did you REALLY look at the reviews there he posted.

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum...review-25.html

There's the conclusion there:
7970 average improvement vs the regular 580 is 24%.

If you go through all the reviews the 580 3GB picks up a frame or 2 here or there but nothing significant. So going by hardware canucks numbers the 580 3gb would be merely 20% slower than 7970. I know you're obviously hurt but please don't lie.

[cadaveca]

Originally Posted by Crap Daddy

Here, some eyefinity for ya:

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/..._card_review/9

Yeah, great, one card, usually less than 40 FPS average. Yippie. Still useless to me. I need dual 7970, vs dual 6990 or equivalent.






This just tells me that AMD's marketing is still fail, new staff or not. Every reviewer should have been supplied with 3 monitors, a stand, and two or three 7970 VGAs. Rory Read needs to be fired, as clearly he is incapable of ensuring that his staff do their jobs properly.


7970, yeah, it's nice, less power from the wall, more perforamnce. Great. But OMG, someone please put these things to good real-world use, and share the numbers!!!

I'm now going back to clocking ram. Cheers.

[sauron]

CPU:Intel Core i7 920 @ 3.8 GHz

Why?

[Jeffredo]

Looks like a great card - very efficient for the performance - but damn these "soft launches". If the card isn't going to be available retail for three weeks, keep your mouth shut AMD. Whatever happened to the good old days when reviews and retail availability coincided?

[cadaveca]

Originally Posted by sauron

Why?

Because I have TPU's 3960X and supporting boards, on the other side of the ocean.



S'alright?

Actually, honestly, to me, using X58 @ 3.8 is closer to replicating what the average user will get with a 7970, performance-wise. Probably half of 7970 buyers will be using something pre-SB/SB-E.

Also, the review guide that was flaoting around before the launch used other paltforms, so it's intereting to see numbers from something AMD didn't use themselves. If all the reviews used the same hardware, there'd be no point to having more than a single review published, on one single site.

[Delta6326]

Why are people complaining about price the 7970 isn't even released yet I say wait till the 9th and then complain(not saying the price will be lower or higher) if the 7970 is to high VS 580 is over 1 year old. And it really isn't that bad.


AVG Price is $510, 580's $6630/13=$510

AVG Price is $585, 580 3GB's $2340/4=$585

[LAN_deRf_HA]

Originally Posted by Mussels

pity about the price, but thats one thing that WILL get better over time.

Will it? Look at the 580. It's price hasn't budged since launch. The only reason I'm getting a 580 3Gb is because I found one new for $430 and that's all it's worth this far into it's life, but Nvidia and AMD would seem to disagree with that logic. The 7970 won't budge in price as long as the 580 doesn't budge in price. Neither have to move because their price is relative to their performance. Nvidia and AMD have been doing this at a distance price fixing since the 5xxx series. Why fight a price war when they can just slot cards in between.

[Jeffredo]

The GTX 580 dipped down the the low $400 range about a month ago for a short time. Its back up to $500+ now.

[OneCool]

Well it looks like AMD got the 7xxx series right.

Reckon they could get BullDozer fixed with a revision or is it to late?

[OrbitzXT]

Originally Posted by the54thvoid

Why the flip (too early for swearing) can't AMD spend some time making a proper damn cooler? If you're going to release a new kick ass card that I 'was' tempted to go for (for the Pci-e x3 novelty), why don't you make sure the cooler is quiet at load? It's not like it draws huge power and creates lots of heat.

I agree, I've owned both AMD and nVidia cards over the years and I'm not a fan boy, but the noise has turned me off to AMD for awhile now. The last card I owned was a 4870X2...and that got hot so I can understand the noise, but as you say the 7970 is efficient and shouldn't have this issue.

[human_error]

Thanks for the great review w1zz. Also I for one am glad you still use an i7 920@3.8 as that's what I'm still using and won't be updating for a little while yet.

As for the card this looks good, and performs pretty well (the real boosts in performance are in compute tasks as Anandtech has investigated) but I just get the feeling that the real gains will be in the 8k series when AMD have been able to identify weaknesses in the new arcitecture, so my 5970 gets to stay for another year (longest I've ever had a GPU for).

[W1zzard]

Originally Posted by cadaveca

Because I have TPU's 3960X and supporting boards, on the other side of the ocean.



S'alright?

Actually, honestly, to me, using X58 @ 3.8 is closer to replicating what the average user will get with a 7970, performance-wise. Probably half of 7970 buyers will be using something pre-SB/SB-E.

i disagree. i think most users of this card will be on normal sandy bridge. lga2011 is simply a waste of money - and tpu is catered toward the price/performance enthusiast crowd that favours overclocking (that's also why we have an oc'd i7 920 and not some more expensive cpu)

i haven't upgraded to sandy bridge because of its lack of good multi-gpu support (need two x16 pcie links, otherwise you people would complain about it in the cf / sli reviews).

i will definitely look into upgrading the vga benchmark rig to ivy bridge, because the i920 will be outdated in 2012

[TheMailMan78]

Originally Posted by W1zzard

i disagree. i think most users of this card will be on normal sandy bridge. lga2011 is simply a waste of money - and tpu is catered toward the price/performance enthusiast crowd that favours overclocking (that's also why we have an oc'd i7 920 and not some more expensive cpu)

i haven't upgraded to sandy bridge because of its lack of good multi-gpu support (need two x16 pcie links, otherwise you people would complain about it in the cf / sli reviews).

i will definitely look into upgrading the vga benchmark rig to ivy bridge, because the i920 will be outdated in 2012

Quick since your reading the thread how did you bench BF3?!

[Assimilator]

So multi-monitor setups still run at max memory clocks (http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/HD_7970/31.html) and higher vCore, hence negating much of the benefit of the new lower power draw at idle.

Not impressed.

[W1zzard]

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

Quick since your reading the thread how did you bench BF3?!

single player jet map like everyone else

[Kaotik]

Originally Posted by W1zzard

single player jet map like everyone else

Since I'm not sure if you got time to read all the posts:

Originally Posted by Kaotik

W1zzard, now I'm 100% confirmed something went wrong, and badly, at least with 6870 - it's performance at 1920x1200 on average in previous review was nearly 20% over 6850 - yet in the 7970 it's mere 6% faster than 6850 at same resolution

edit:
In fact, 6870 has exactly same speed as 6850 in "all resolutions", and loses to 6850 1024x768 - no matter how irrelevant resolution, that simply tells that something borked on at least HD6870 benching.

Can't know for sure if any other card bench is borked, but 6870 results for sure are

[TheMailMan78]

Originally Posted by W1zzard

single player jet map like everyone else

Ah ok. Thanks!

[W1zzard]

i rebenched the hd 5970 and uploaded new summary graphs with the corrected results

[cadaveca]

Originally Posted by W1zzard

i disagree. i think most users of this card will be on normal sandy bridge. lga2011 is simply a waste of money - and tpu is catered toward the price/performance enthusiast crowd that favours overclocking (that's also why we have an oc'd i7 920 and not some more expensive cpu)

i haven't upgraded to sandy bridge because of its lack of good multi-gpu support (need two x16 pcie links, otherwise you people would complain about it in the cf / sli reviews).

i will definitely look into upgrading the vga benchmark rig to ivy bridge, because the i920 will be outdated in 2012

It just seems to me that those that bought or were interested in SB, have it already. There are a few single-card holdouts, for sure, but most users already with sandybridge bought 6950, chasing the unlock, and most bought two, as for $500, they offered decent performance. icannot see many of those users really interested in the 7970...not @ $500 ea. Those that can afford that cost went GTX580 anyway, you'd think. Perhaps the upgrade itch will sell a lot of cards come tax time, but with retail launch not until January 9th, who knows how it will work.

2011 overkill and expensive...sure...but the 4-core might save it, if it ever comes out.

This is the first card launch that I can think of in a long time that doesn't have it's "killer app", too. It's a weird launch...given the overclcoks, you'd think they'd have gone for the "First consumer 1GHz GPU" to match the Guiness record of Bulldozer, or something.